Exactly same height and used to be 113. Now 95 and still falling quick

1. yep. (imo and experince with carbon tubs)

2. No answer unless you like burning money. Go on a holiday or take family somewhere special.

Cheap ass fulcrum 5's or 7's will see you through till your down a bit, and will help you get there!

Sorry if this is not the answer your looking for, but spending a *f##k** massive shiteload of cash to save 200g on a pair of wheels will not make you go any faster up the hills. Ride lots - drink less, smash all the puny dudes into the ground on the flats and in the wind on your cheap ass wheels. It's called weight training. When you get down to 85kg buy a pair of carbon tubs and pretend to be a racer.

The rims alone is claimed to weigh a total of 885g from several sources, and the Chris King hubs which I believe must be the R-45 is 317g (anyway its the lightest from CK). Thats 1202g, so now you have approx 48g for spokes and nipples. Explain it to me, what am I missing?

I also have a seller here in Norway who is claiming a weight of 1245g for the clincher version with CK R-45 hubs.

The rims alone is claimed to weigh a total of 885g from several sources, and the Chris King hubs which I believe must be the R-45 is 317g (anyway its the lightest from CK). Thats 1202g, so now you have approx 48g for spokes and nipples. Explain it to me, what am I missing?

I also have a seller here in Norway who is claiming a weight of 1245g for the clincher version with CK R-45 hubs.

So I guess it comes down to rim weight, checking fairwheelbikes the weight for both rims supports my earlier statement (890g there).FWIW all wheels "checked" has 20/24 spokes

Im just a big ? now

Really want them, but want to save some grams with new wheels too

Bikeradar's review is of the tubular set since that's what was released first and the clincher version came out afterwards. Nonetheless, it's still interesting that their measured weight (1,277g) exceeded Enve's quoted variation of +/- 2%: their specified weight for the R45 3.4 set is 1320g. Merlin cycles is erroneously quoting the tubular weight for their clincher set.

You can get a rough estimate of what a build would weigh using wheelbuilder's calculator. It's not completely spot on, but it's close enough to get an idea: http://www.wheelbuilder.com/wheel-weigh ... lator.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bikeradar's review is of the tubular set since that's what was released first and the clincher version came out afterwards. Nonetheless, it's still interesting that their measured weight (1,277g) exceeded Enve's quoted variation of +/- 2%: their specified weight for the R45 3.4 set is 1320g. Merlin cycles is erroneously quoting the tubular weight for their clincher set.

You can get a rough estimate of what a build would weigh using wheelbuilder's calculator. It's not completely spot on, but it's close enough to get an idea: http://www.wheelbuilder.com/wheel-weigh ... lator.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for the answer:)Yes Ive used that calculator and that gives me a total weight of 1407g with sapim CX-ray spokes. So I guess it comes to what the actual weight of these are, have someone weighed them themselves?

And what other carbon clinchers with a 30-50mm profile is out there, that maybe weighs in between these 3.4 R45 and the LW Meilenstein C that is 1230g? Of course we have the Zipp 202 firecrest at 1375g..

I have my 3.4 clinchers with Alchemy ELF/ORC-UL coming in on tues, when it shows up I could post the weights. As for the stock weight I can't remember the top of my head, but the specs on enve's site sound about right for the 3.4 clincher DT240s stock weight.

First of all, you aren't too heavy for some carbon clinchers. Reynolds has no specific weight limit, but they do recommend that you ride 24-spoke rear wheels to hand the weight. I tip the scales around your size, and have used my current wheels for three years with no problems (recent issues with nipples have to do with corrosion, caused by living near the sea, I would imagine).

Regarding the hubs, given your size, I would probably go with the DT 240 hubs. I've read that they are more robust, and have been using them on several wheelsets (Reynolds and Bontrager - road and mountain) without issues. They may be a little heavier than the 180's or 190's, but can take a beating.

The biggest concern manufacturers have with heavier riders and carbon clinchers is prolonged braking. You heavier guys better get your technique down. The better manufacturers have improved heat management by leaps and bounds, but no company can guaranty against a +225lb rider cooking the brake track on a long, steep descent by dragging the brakes. Leave the carbon clinchers home if you are headed to the mountains.

Honestly at your weight, I would choose a clincher that you can up the spoke count. The Enve Classic 45 and 65 can be had in 28 hole so you can get a set built up 24/28 instead of 20/24 like the Smart line. With the mixture of hills and flats I would go with the 65mm rims. in 24/28 they will be a very strong set of wheels.

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum